Theme: Grammar

  • Define ‘State’

    Define ‘State’.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-13 21:20:51 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/797912134436818944

    Reply addressees: @ThisMachin

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/797909220565729282


    IN REPLY TO:

    @ThisMachin

    @curtdoolittle So where are your stateless markets from prehistory? I’m curious which archeology shows this.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/797909220565729282

  • I know you’re teasing, but morality provides no decidability, non imposition doe

    I know you’re teasing, but morality provides no decidability, non imposition does. So this is one of the problems of synonyms.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-11 17:06:58 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/797123463609745408

    Reply addressees: @carson_gross

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/797122438857248769


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/797122438857248769

  • When I started,I had only the intention of creating a language for the rational

    When I started,I had only the intention of creating a language for the rational articulation of western civilization. But I solved soc. sci.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-11 13:59:13 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/797076217178505216

  • So translating from adult language to infantilized language: yes, I agree, you a

    So translating from adult language to infantilized language: yes, I agree, you are ‘creepy’.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-11 13:28:29 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/797068483422982144

    Reply addressees: @OlNippy @voxdotcom

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/797066258495586308


    IN REPLY TO:

    @olBoozy

    @curtdoolittle @voxdotcom oops? Too creepy for me. Bye

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/797066258495586308

  • Adults use different vocabulary to express in intellectual and scientific terms,

    Adults use different vocabulary to express in intellectual and scientific terms, what ‘creepy’ expresses in sentimental.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-11 13:27:52 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/797068326279270400

    Reply addressees: @OlNippy @voxdotcom

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/797066258495586308


    IN REPLY TO:

    @olBoozy

    @curtdoolittle @voxdotcom oops? Too creepy for me. Bye

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/797066258495586308

  • When I started,I had only the intention of creating a language for the rational

    When I started,I had only the intention of creating a language for the rational articulation of western civilization. But I solved soc. sci.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-11 08:59:00 UTC

  • (i know the difference between trash talking, propagandizing, marketing, and con

    (i know the difference between trash talking, propagandizing, marketing, and constructing an argument. They all sound very different from each other.)


    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-09 12:40:00 UTC

  • APPARENTLY DEEP PHILOSOPHICAL QUESTIONS ARE NOT DEEP AT ALL – JUST WORD GAMES -A

    APPARENTLY DEEP PHILOSOPHICAL QUESTIONS ARE NOT DEEP AT ALL – JUST WORD GAMES -AND HERE ARE SOME EXAMPLES.

    >>Wo are you?

    Empty verbalism by substitution. Translation. “What is the name you that exists?” (meaningless) People call me by an identifier. Do you mean instead what preferences do I hold? Do you mean instead what abilities can I demonstrate? Do you mean instead, what actions have I taken? Do you mean instead, what memories I can recall? Any use of the verb to-be in a philosophical question is a form of deceit by substitution and suggestion.

    >>>what are our ”selves” made of?

    Do you mean, under what conditions would I no longer demonstrate expected behavior to others? Do you mean under what conditions would i begin to recognize a change in my behavior? Do you mean under what conditions would I no longer recognize a recording of myself as familiar?

    I think the answer to both of these questions is (a) cognitive biases and preferences of genetic origin, and (b) experiences we retain in memory, (c) the means by which we process and act upon these biases and experiences. Because that is the evidence.

    >>>example: if you would loose all your memories, who would you be?

    Another phrasing that is an empty verbal trick or deception. “Who” refers to the criteria of demarcation by others: a name, a set of memories held by others, a set of memories demonstrated by you, a set of cognitive biases demonstrated by you, and a set of means (algorithms and rules), demonstrated b you.

    One might say “I am not myself”, and others may say “he is not himself’ largely because something in one’s biases or means is inconsistent with those that one has habituated. (Habituation is a discount that does not require the effort of reason.)

    >>> is it that we(our characters), are really just the result of the experiences we had in our life?

    Our character consists of both biases and memories. At present it appears that biases are disproportionately influential in determining the experiences we seek and recall. The debate is whether these biases cause 80% of our behavior or less. The remainder is environmental (experiential). This is logical since there is an advantage to informational evolution (training), prior to its integration (genetic) through selection. But conversely, reason is weak, and greater environmental influence would increase risks of persistence.

    >>> are we merely imitating what we experience?

    We demonstrate through the information accumulated in our (very,very,very expensive)genetics, expressed in our (very expensive) biases, modified by our (expensive) algorithms(habits), and further modified by our(less expensive, but more fragile) memories, that we react to the evolutionary, inter-generational, inter-temporal, and temporal record of experiences. And it is this ‘knowledge’ accumulated in many forms that has allowed us to outwit the dark forces of entropy, time, and ignorance.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-08 09:44:00 UTC

  • Q&A: WHAT IS PLATONISM AND WHY IS IT AN ERROR? (advanced philosophy made meaning

    Q&A: WHAT IS PLATONISM AND WHY IS IT AN ERROR?

    (advanced philosophy made meaningful)

    Platonism can refer to AT LEAST the following:

    … 1) the philosophy of Plato in toto.

    … 2) that imperceptible reality is intelligible by appeal to abstract analogy.

    … 3) the use of fantasy and imaginary as substitution for ignorance or to obscure deception.

    … 4) the prior existence of abstract objects – or at least their determinism as an appeal to authority for the use of imaginary entities.

    … 5) the existence of a third reality beyond that of the physical, and the thinking – the supernatural – in which these entities exist.

    (ed: re-orderd for clarity)

    All of which are means of avoiding the COSTLY actions necessary to observe the unobservable through the development of instrumentation.

    I tend to think of it as the set of metaphysical, cultural, normative, habitual, and genetic information that users either cannot imagine exist competitors or alternatives.

    But people use it basically as a means of saving costs in order to justify their priors.

    I suspect that is because we all have a greater genetic interest in moral priors, and knowledge priors, such that we seek to preserve our investment or make use of the wayfinding that current investment allows us. So we all need bridges from whatever wayfinding we use, to some alternative.

    In other words, we have a habit of using informational substitution of the unknown as if it is of equal empirical content to the known, as a means of preserving our ability to make judgments, whether those judgments be avoidance of cost, the preservation of investments(priors), perpetuation of existing frauds, or production of new frauds.

    THIS IS PLATONISM:

    the substitution of fantasy for information as either a means of cost avoidance, of obscuring comforting and advantageous deceptions, or of preserving comforting falsehoods.

    Platonism is to philosophy(truth) what suggestion is to deceit.

    CONFLATIONISM

    I suspect that the majority of conflationsm in thinking that affects the non-European world’s thought, is the consequence of their failure to isolate the observable and actionable, from the analogistic and the narratives we use to form consensus.

    The importance of western non-conflation is something that is obvious in our institutions. We separate religion and law and science. But it is not so obvious that our martial epistemology and our sovereignty is the cause of it. (Or even if we are more mentally predisposed to it for some reason).

    Platonism is something we struggle to be rid of by operationalism, and thereby separate the deterministic (numbers from identical categories) from an imaginary reality (a mathematical reality).

    So I view operationalism as an extension of western non-conflation, and a necessary test of existential possibility, and likewise a necessary test of appeals to truth that are in fact, appeals to imagined unknowns wherein we lack knowledge of causality due to (a) cost, (b) convenient preservation of investments, (c) conveneint preservation of frauds.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-07 08:58:00 UTC

  • ( I FINALLY FEEL LIKE I CAN WRITE LIKE I WISH TO. IT TOOK FIFTEEN YEARS OF WORK)

    ( I FINALLY FEEL LIKE I CAN WRITE LIKE I WISH TO. IT TOOK FIFTEEN YEARS OF WORK)

    I had to develop a language, develop a complete philosophical framework, but I can now describe western civilization in ratio-scientific language, and state how to restore it to its former glory.

    Thank you to all who helped me on this journey to at least marginal comprehensibility. 😉


    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-06 13:48:00 UTC